First, because of the economy at the national level, “school budgets are strained at the private level, diminishing the quality of education” (Whelan, 2009, p.1). When budget issues arise because of economic difficulties, layoffs of teaching staff occur or certain activities which provide better education are cut from the school curriculum. The University of Leeds, as one example, recently announced a major budget reduction of £35 million, with most of this in areas of staff wages (Whelan). When staff members are layed off or witness salary reductions, their internal motivations to provide quality education are reduced. This is why the government should use their strong financial resources to prop up private budgets so that students can have access to free educational tools and not worry about being given an education by unmotivated instructors.
Also, at the parent level, the costs of education are significant and growing each year. The average cost to put one child through school is £10,000 (Ross, 2009). When parents are facing rising costs in areas of household spending, such as with food inflation, these high costs of education can make parents have to decide to put their child through schooling which is not superior in terms of quality or performance. The government has the expertise and resources to assist in taking this burden off parents so that spending can occur in other areas to enhance household lifestyle.
Third, free education would open up a great deal of choice for potential students and they would no longer be bound to attending only local or affordable colleges and universities. Using governmental resources, a student can begin analysis of many different learning facilities to find the one which best fits their unique skills or career-needs profile. When students are forced to pay the bill for